Trial Objections (Federal & Oregon State Court) - Arnold Law in Eugene, Oregon – Powerful Advocacy. Proven Results.

Trial Objections (Federal & Oregon State Court)

Law is war and objections are a tactic that, when used, should meet your overall strategic goals.  An attorney should never make a frivolous objection.  All objections should be based on the rules of evidence.  However, even if there is an objection available, an attorney should not object for the sake of objecting.  Attorneys that do this can harm their client’s case greatly.  Doing so can annoy the jury and judge.

Now, if your goal is to interrupt the flow of the witness or prosecutor with a well-founded objection, then that might be a good reason to use this tactic to meet your overall strategic goals.  To paraphrase Sun Tzu: if your opponent has a choleric temper, irritate him.

From Pocket Art of War (Available on Amazon)

[From Pocket Art of War (Available on Amazon)]

And remember, the judge and jury are not your opponents, so only irritate them if it achieves a strategic goal, which would be rare but does happen (more rarely for irritating the jury but it can be explained in closing or in a more verbose “speaking objection.”).

Some Common Trial Objections


Hearsay: “Objection, calls for hearsay.” If hearsay given, “Move to strike as hearsay. [Sustained.] We request a limiting instruction.”Hearsay is an out of court statement used to prove the truth of the matter asserted.  The most common way around hearsay (other than a statement by a party opponent which is non-hearsay) is when it is being used for the effect on the listener.  If this happens, then the proper objection would also include Rules 403 and 404 (see below).
– Improper Character Evidence (Rule 404):
Unfairly Prejudicial, Confusing to Jury (Rule 403):
Cumulative/Asked and Answered:


Leading:  Suggesting answers on direct examination (leading is okay for cross or a hostile witness on direct)
– Calls for speculation: usually involving how someone else feels.
– Asks for a legal conclusion.

“Law is War” Podcast Episode 2: Trial Objections – How to Train a Witness

For more information on the strategy of objections, watch the podcast, “Law is War,” Episode 2.

For more information, call 541-338-9111.

Interpreters Available
  • Firm Philosophy

    A Team Approach to Litigation

    At Arnold Law we look at every case as a team effort. The team consists of your lawyers, Arnold Law support staff, experts, investigators, and YOU.

    Let’s break this down, starting with YOU: You as the client are a vital part of the legal team. You have been living the events that have led up to this litigation. You are often the best person to consult for historical information and background. Clients have also been known to come up with some very creative and strategic legal ideas. Because of this, we encourage clients to brainstorm ideas and we listen to them carefully. Of course, without legal training, many ideas of clients are legally impossible or invalid, but that’s okay. Because there is often a gem in there that even the lawyers didn’t think of.

    Next, are the lawyers. Picking a lawyer or team of lawyers is often the most important decision a person makes in their life if the stakes of the case are high enough. Let’s take a divorce for example. Many people say that picking a spouse is the most difficult/important choice. That’s true on many levels, but you can divorce them; the choice isn’t permanent. If you choose a divorce lawyer poorly, you might be saddled permanently with their financial errors (i.e., support, missing assets, improperly divided retirement accounts, etc.). If you pick a criminal defense lawyer poorly, you may face the permanent consequences from a prison cell or at the unemployment office.

    Our Size Allows Flexibility for Each Case

    Our firm’s structure allows us to give each case the appropriate resources that it deserves in line with the client’s goals. If a client has a cost saving goal, then they may elect to have an associate attorney handle their case, knowing that a partner oversees their work and gives guidance. This allows clients to have the best of both worlds: the oversight of an experienced partner with the cost-saving advantage of an associate attorney to do the day-to-day work.

    For the more complex cases in the firm, two attorneys may be assigned to the case, particularly in commercial litigation and complex criminal defense. Two attorneys on a case has several advantages. Primarily, it allows an experienced attorney on the case with an associate attorney to bill less money per hour on tasks not requiring the partner. This allows money to go much farther and also saves costs through efficiencies (lawyers are assigned tasks based on their strengths). This way we can avoid billing partner rates for research projects or discovery projects, for instance.

    The old adage that “two heads are better than one” also holds true. Part of becoming experienced is acquiring wisdom. And wisdom is often knowing what you don’t know. Oftentimes, it’s the young associate attorney (or even the client) who comes up with the fresh perspective in a case that proves to be the game winning idea.

    Another reason that two heads are better than one is because we are a trial firm. Clients hire us because we are trial lawyers. This means sometimes we are in trial and unavailable on other cases. Having another lawyer up-to-speed assists greatly in these instances.